By Oliver Mills:
The Minister of Education for Jamaica, Andrew Holness, in his Education Week message, urged teachers to continue empowering students. He described an empowered learner as one motivated to perform tasks, finds them meaningful, feels competent to perform them, and feels his or her efforts have an impact on the scheme of things.
The minister further appealed to all teachers to be empowering instructors, who help students see the relevance and importance of learning their lessons and carrying out assigned tasks.
This advice to teachers is very profound, and on a surface level no one would seriously disagree with Minister Holness. But matters of education have to be given a more incisive examination and analysis, in terms of their meaning, and impact on the educational system, and the society in general.
Although the minister describes an empowered learner, he does not say how teachers should go about empowering them. We can use phrases or concepts, but what is most important, is how to implement them. For example, how can a teacher help students to find tasks meaningful, or to feel competent? What does the teacher have to do to bring about this result? How can students be brought to see the relevance of learning, when in most cases it is divorced from the local context?
From a philosophical point of view, is the description given by Mr Holness of an empowered learner accurate? Is it valid? And, is there such a thing as being empowered?
The minister’s description suggests that empowerment is within the teacher’s domain to give, or distribute. Furthermore, he does not provide a definition of an empowered learner, but gives a description instead. How could something be described, without defining it initially?
Again, at what level of school is the minister referring to? Is it at the preparatory level, primary, secondary, or tertiary? Does it make sense at the preparatory level of education to talk about empowering students? Even at the tertiary level, many students are only interested in receiving a credential, and leaving the institution as quickly as possible.
In addition, at the secondary and tertiary levels, even if teachers try to empower students, the students know that because of the power structure of the school, they have to give back to the teacher what was told to them. If not, there could be consequences with respect to the grades they receive. Teachers see empowerment as giving away, or reducing their power and authority, and often enjoy exercising it, rather than reducing it.
Also, both in institutions, and in the organisations of the wider society, people in authority feel that position power is what they have earned, and that it goes with the territory. They use it to frighten, cajole, influence, and demand, and if their demands are not met, dire consequences could follow for the individual concerned.
But in another sense, appealing to teachers to be empowering instructors presupposes that teachers know what this entails. Are there instructors who are not empowered? If facts have to be learned and skills delivered, could we speak of empowering people, when the result is already known and can be determined?
The point is, also, that no one could help another to see that a task is meaningful. Meaning is derived from the experiences and world view of the concerned person. It is not something that others could be led to see. People generally give their own interpretation of what they are given, and proceed to use different strategies to get the same result, a better result, or even a different one. Could we then speak of teachers as being empowered instructors?
We all have to be careful that when we use the latest phrases and concepts, that we know how to apply them effectively, since they often come from other areas not related to the one we are dealing with. Empowered, and empowerment come from the areas of management and organisational studies applied to the commercial context.
These concepts have then been imported into education, and used loosely and arbitrarily. The structure and power relations of the educational system then reject them, because of threats to its image. The education sector in the Caribbean is acquisitive, not distributive. It holds on to the status quo, and resents what it sees as external influences which might diminish its frame of operation.
Advising teachers to be empowering agents, therefore, goes against their entire philosophy of education, learning, and inner being. Teachers are very astute, and will politely and respectfully listen to any new innovation by politicians. But when it comes to putting it into effect, they water it down, reinterpret it, or just simply drag their feet, knowing the system is helpless to do anything about accountability.
Also, they know that the lease of life on the politician is short, and that the next election could bring a change in ministerial responsibility, by having another person with a different outlook being appointed. And, most drastically, the government could be changed, with a different educational perspective. They therefore are the ones who win in the end, although nothing significantly is done to better the situation, which could have possibly been transformed to their and the students’ advantage.
But who really is an empowering teacher, and what is an empowered student? Is there such a thing? Is it not the case that a teacher who has undergone professional training and received a credential is already empowered, and therefore does not need to be told that he or she should be an empowering instructor?
Furthermore, is empowerment for teachers and students not something that is personal and psychological, and cannot be imposed from outside? Is empowerment not the positive exercise of the will through personal choice? Is it not being self-propelled to act to transform a situation for the better? Is not the ability to reason, make logical connections, see things in their entirety, and make prudent decisions with respect to which path should be pursued evidence of an empowered individual, teacher or student? Is empowerment not something to do with bringing the resources of our inner spirit to bear in changing and reforming circumstances brought on by societal dynamics? And, is therefore not related to the actions of those in authority, or who are impacted on by these actions? So is there any such thing as being either empowered, disempowered, or powerless?
What is important in this empowerment debate is that we need to define and give meaning to the concepts we use, so as not to confuse, but enlighten. Educators at all levels should therefore be careful in their delivery of knowledge that they facilitate an environment where wisdom and understanding are promoted. Students and educators should be collaborators in the learning process and not separated by position power, where one has authority over the other. They should also be co-creators in the learning process, since learners also have an independent perspective, and point of view.
Empowerment exists where differences in outlook are allowed to flourish, where there is no privileging of a particular position, and where the learning environment encourages and not condemns. Most importantly. empowerment is further realised where the learning context is nurturing, not dismissive or fearful, and where there is no right or wrong position, but just another viewpoint to be supported and justified by evidence.
There is therefore no power structure involving teachers or students where empowerment is concerned, no position, or individual authority conferred by the system, and no situation where influence translates into clout. What the aim should be is the co-creation by those involved of an empowered situation or atmosphere, where the search for truth through prudent dialogue is the operating ethic.
May 12, 2011
caribbeannewsnow
Caribbean Blog International
available in: 
